Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2021 Feb 25:12:638863.
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.638863. eCollection 2021.

Standardization and Quality Assessment Under the Perspective of Automated Computer-Assisted HEp-2 Immunofluorescence Assay Systems

Affiliations
Review

Standardization and Quality Assessment Under the Perspective of Automated Computer-Assisted HEp-2 Immunofluorescence Assay Systems

Luigi Cinquanta et al. Front Immunol. .

Abstract

The recent availability of automated computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) systems for the reading and interpretation of the anti-nuclear antibody (ANA) test performed with the indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) method on HEp-2 cells, has improved the reproducibility of the results and initiated a process of harmonization of this test. Furthermore, CAD systems provide quantitative expression of fluorescence intensity, allowing the introduction of objective quality control procedures to the monitoring of the entire process. The calibration of the reading systems and the automated image interpretation are essential prerequisites for obtaining reproducible and harmonized IIF test results and form the basis for standardization, regardless of the computer algorithms used in the different systems. The use of automated CAD systems, facilitating control procedures, represents a step forward for the quality certification of the laboratory.

Keywords: anti-nuclear antibodies; automation; computer-assisted systems; harmonization; immunofluorescence; standardization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Complete processing cycle of automated HEp-2 cells assay reading by Aklides system (reproduced from Hiemann R, et al. Challenges of automated screening and differentiation of non-organ specific autoantibodies on HEp-2 cells. Autoimmunity Rev 2009; 9:17-22) (29).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Steps related to quality control and interpretation of the results using the automated CAD procedure for the determination of ANA in indirect immunofluorescence.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Tozzoli R, Bizzaro N, Tonutti E, Villalta D, Bassetti D, Manoni F, et al. . Guidelines for the laboratory use of autoantibody tests in the diagnosis and monitoring of autoimmune rheumatic diseases. Am J Clin Pathol (2002) 117:316–24. 10.1309/Y5VF-C3DM-L8XV-U053 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Solomon DH, Kavanaugh AJ, Schur PH, American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Immunologic Testing Guidelines . Evidence based guidelines for the use of immunologic tests: antinuclear antibody testing. Arthritis Rheum (2002) 47:434–44. 10.1002/art.10561 - DOI - PubMed
    1. American College of Rheumatology . Current practice issues: ACR tracking concerns about ANA testing results. Atlanta, GA: American College of Rheumatology; (2009).
    1. Agmon-Levin N, Damoiseaux J, Kallenberg C, Sack U, Witte T, Herold M, et al. . International recommendations for the assessment of autoantibodies to cellular antigens referred to as antinuclear antibodies. Ann Rheum Dis (2014) 73:17–23. 10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-205324 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Copple SS, Giles SR, Jaskowski TD, Gardiner AE, Wilson AM, Hill HR. Screening for IgG antinuclear autoantibodies by HEp-2 indirect fluorescent antibody assays and the need for standardization. Am J Clin Pathol (2012) 137:825–30. 10.1309/AJCPICNFG7UCES1S - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms

Substances